If you enjoyed reading about "Buffalo with an air rifle?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
owen
November 1, 2007, 04:59 PM
The Quackenbush airguns aren't exactly Red Ryders.
http://www.quackenbushairguns.com/
The LA Outlaw shoots a 430gr bullet at 732fps, which is 509fpe. This rifle will produce two 500+fpe shots from its reservoir on one fill. It doesn’t need to be line fed from a scuba bottle, it doesn’t have the dependency of life support from a remote air source. Configured as a single shot, single fill rifle it will exceed 600fpe.
GunTech
November 1, 2007, 05:26 PM
Big bore air rifles can be considered to be equivalent to BP.
Quackenbush is probably the best known, but there are sevral big bore air rifle makers, and some can throw 50 or 54 caliber bullets at at a pretty good velocity - nothing to sneeze at.
http://www.quackenbushairguns.com/
There are even commercially made PCP that come close to 600 fps with 45 and 50 cal bullets like the ShinSun Dragon slayer
Matt304
November 1, 2007, 05:37 PM
Wow, I would have never guessed they had such energy.
A 430gr at 700+ fps can't penetrate too far though, and notice he was sitting there, while the buffalo stood and died. That seems like an extremely ineffective method of taking buffalo. Kind of like, "I slit its leg, now I sit and wait for it to die."
Cannonball888
November 1, 2007, 05:43 PM
Lewis and Clark took large game with big bore air rifles. They are older than most people realize.
plexreticle
November 1, 2007, 05:48 PM
Stupid way to take and animal of this size.
Kill a Buffalo with and air rifle just for some bizarre kind of bragging rights.
JesseL
November 1, 2007, 06:15 PM
Stupid way to take and animal of this size.
Kill a Buffalo with and air rifle a bow and arrow just for some bizarre kind of bragging rights.
How does that look?
Some people seem to think that if you're hunting with anything less than a 20mm anti tank rifle, guaranteeing instant vaporization of the quarries vital organs, you're an unethical slob with no business holding a hunting license.
plexreticle
November 1, 2007, 08:26 PM
Some people seem to think that if you're hunting with anything less than a 20mm anti tank rifle, guaranteeing instant vaporization of the quarries vital organs, you're an unethical slob with no business holding a hunting license.
Bow and arrow wouldn't be my first choice either. But I bet the animal suffers less than it does from those shot from an air rifle.
If making animals suffer tickles your fancy then go for it. The guys in the vid are killing big game with an airgun to show off how bad ass their toy is.
Is anybody impressed with this? I sure as hell aint.
Any other smart ass comments form the peanut gallery?
owen
November 1, 2007, 08:47 PM
it looked like a really humane kill to me plex.
Battlespace
November 1, 2007, 08:50 PM
Is Dennis Quackenbush related to the Quackenbush family of some late 1800's and early 1900's firearms? I have a Quackenbush .22 single shot that my great-grandfather had around the turn of the century.
GunTech
November 1, 2007, 08:51 PM
Lewis and Clark used an Austrian Contriner airgun. It's pretty amazing to consider that at the time most armies where shooting at other with flintlock smoothbores, the Austrians had a corps equipped with rifled airguns that could fire a dozen rounds as fast as the hammer could be cocked and the trigger pulled that were deadly to at least 150 yards, gove off no smoke and were relatively quiet.
MCgunner
November 1, 2007, 08:54 PM
I bet those air cannons make a noise when they discharge.:what: I'd rather use my .50 Hawken, though. One thing, the air rifle wouldn't need dunking in soapy water. :D
They claim a 500 grain bullet at 700 fps. That might lack some energy, but it carries a LOT of momentum for penetration. Shooting a buffalo, I'd wanna place it in the lungs away from the major bones of the shoulder, though.
marksman13
November 1, 2007, 09:12 PM
Plex, you bash the peanut gallery all you want, but the fact is your way ain't the only way. Bowhunting is an American tradition that is accepted just about everywhere. When you stop to think that the fastest commercial hunting bows are only slinging arrows at around 350 fps with a 100 grain broadhead, a 500 grain slug at 600 fps seems pretty damn acceptable. You sound an awful lot like our old friend Jim Zumbo. "If I don't like it then it must be wrong.":confused::barf:
plexreticle
November 1, 2007, 09:26 PM
Marksman you don't know much about how a broadhead arrow works do you?
Thanks for the math lesson though.
ED21
November 1, 2007, 10:10 PM
http://www.beemans.net/lewis-assault-rifle.htm
A Description of the Lewis Airgun Emerges!
The recent publication (Smith and Swick, 1997) of a little known travel diary journal of a Thomas Rodney, who was a day visitor to Captain Meriwether Lewis while he was traveling down the Ohio River at Wheeling, Ohio in September of 1803, contains a tiny passage which has caused new thinking about the Lewis airgun. The passage reads:
"Visited Captain Lewess barge. He shewed us his air gun which fired 22 times at one charge. He shewed us the mode of charging her and then loaded with 12 balls which he intended to fire one at a time; but she by some means lost the whole charge of air at the first fire. He charged her again and then she fired twice. He then found the cause and in some measure prevented the airs escaping, and then she fired seven times; but when in perfect order she fires 22 times in a minute. All the balls are put at once into a short side barrel and are then droped into the chamber of the gun one at a time by moving a spring; and when the triger is pulled just so much air escapes out of the air bag which forms the britch of the gun as serves for one ball. It is a curious peice of workmanship not easily discribed and therefore I omit attempting it.”
GunTech
November 1, 2007, 10:44 PM
The rifle is in question is often known as the Girandoni system.
Marksman you don't know much about how a broadhead arrow works do you?
Doesn't a broadhead arrow work by slicing through vital tissues, promoting death by bleeding and organ failure? I can't see how a 1/2" bullet poking a hole in the same vitals wouldn't perform at least as well.
musher
November 1, 2007, 11:10 PM
The buff looks pretty dead to me.
All's well that ends well.
Infidel
November 1, 2007, 11:43 PM
It all comes down to pellet placement.
Bob R
November 1, 2007, 11:47 PM
If you want to do it the "right" way, run beside them waving a hide and chase them (it) over a cliff. Then have the women butcher them out.
:neener: :)
bob
Bezoar
November 1, 2007, 11:57 PM
actually this is a dead debate. Its all in the projectile. There is or was a gentleman who was selling 50 caliber airguns that were garunteed to kill waterbuffalo.
The trick is that you had two choices of projectile. An explosive one that would penetrate and explode inside the water buffalo. Or one that would detonate on contact with water buffalo skin.
His website had a nice gallery of successful hunts. Its pretty creepy to see a dangerous animal like a water buffalo with an entire shoulder missing.
Matt304
November 2, 2007, 12:30 AM
What?
Tell me that is a joke.
LAR-15
November 2, 2007, 01:20 AM
Neat
Harve Curry
November 2, 2007, 06:04 AM
Looks good to me. A big bore air rifle is facinating to me.
Years ago the American Rifleman had a story on the Lewis & Clark air rifles. As I recall there were two, they had hollow copper stocks for air chambers. Each came in a fitted box with a pump similar to a bicycle pump. A bystander standing on the river bank was killed by a A.D., while someone on the boat was showing the rifle off. Only one of the rifles is accounted for.
marksman13
November 2, 2007, 12:41 PM
Plex, perhaps you could educate me as an ignorant bow hunter. How exactly does a broadhead work? I was under the assumption that those little blade thingys that stick off the sides of the pointy thinga ma doodle cut through tissue and arteries and caused the big bad animals to bleed to death. I also hear that those broadhead whatchamacallits leave big ol holes in hearts and lungs which leads to a very rapid death. How much different is that then a .50 caliber bullet? I'm sorry that I am so ignorant, Oh Great One. Please help me to leave my simple minded state.;)
koja48
November 2, 2007, 04:24 PM
Not my cup of tea, but looked both humane & that the gun was a match for the game.
PercyShelley
November 4, 2007, 01:35 AM
Here (http://www.glbarnes.com/yukon_series.html) is a .58 air rifle that can deliver more than 600 foot pounds. That's blackpowder territory for sure.
4v50 Gary
November 4, 2007, 01:44 AM
Holy cows PercyShelley. That's one heckuva air rifle. That smacks of the Girandoni carried by some Napoleonic-era Austrian Jaegers. .58 caliber is a huge hunk of luck to be throwing down range.
PercyShelley
November 4, 2007, 07:50 AM
Scary isn't it?
The Barnes rifles seem to be custom, heavily customized pieces. As you say, an echo of the bygone era when these weapons were the choice of nobility and that period's high speed, low drag "operators". Quieter, faster shooting and no smoke compared to a musket.
The pieces themselves look curious (http://www.glbarnes.com/catalog.html), but the guy is claiming some serious performance with some of them.
Since air rifles can't fire supersonic projectiles, the only way to increase the power of them is progressively larger and heavier projectiles. This fellow is offering nightmarishly huge air guns, up to 87 caliber (http://www.glbarnes.com/field_justice.html)!
Blackfork
November 4, 2007, 09:30 AM
Sounds like its about the same numbers as black powder or bow. Looks OK to me.
I'm surprised airguns didn't get wider development. Quiet. Lighter cartridge. No smoke. Same profile as gunpowder arm.
JesseL
November 4, 2007, 02:15 PM
Since air rifles can't fire supersonic projectiles, the only way to increase the power of them is progressively larger and heavier projectiles. This fellow is offering nightmarishly huge air guns, up to 87 caliber!
Has anyone tried charging air rifles with a lighter gas (like helium), which would have a higher speed of sound propagation, to increase performance?
Harve Curry
November 4, 2007, 07:48 PM
Helium seems like it would be dangerous, since it's an explosive gas by it's self.
Jimmy Newman
November 4, 2007, 08:09 PM
Helium isn't explosive... hydrogen is. Helium is almost completely inert.
The Hindenburg was full of hydrogen, not helium. Modern dirigibles use helium so they don't catch on fire and fall out of the sky.
(Hydrogen is a lot easier to produce, though)
PercyShelley
November 5, 2007, 09:38 PM
Has anyone tried charging air rifles with a lighter gas (like helium), which would have a higher speed of sound propagation, to increase performance?
Well, there are two stage gas guns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_gas_gun), but I'm guessing you've heard of those before.
Helium and hydrogen are tricky; they like to leak. For a light gas air rifle, you would need exceptionally good seals.
GunTech
November 5, 2007, 11:58 PM
Of course you could always ad something like ether to a spring gun and get more power via 'deiseling', but then it wouldn't be a true air gun.
The Barnes stuff is great - very steampunk.
Harve Curry
November 6, 2007, 10:43 AM
Thanks for correcting me. I thought it was helium. You can learn all the time here.
oklahoma caveman
November 9, 2007, 11:26 PM
iv always heard that a 22cb placed through the lungs of a skunk will not cause the animal to spray as it feels no fear from the low impact or something. it doesnt scare them cuz it doesnt hurt as bad as a larger more powerful bullet. if thats true then technically coudnt the same be true of the airgun/buffalo?
as long as its legal and it makes a humane kill what difference does it make what the weapon is?
If you enjoyed reading about "Buffalo with an air rifle?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!